Interim Decision #1925 

MATTER or BAEZ-AYALA 

In Adjustment of Status Proceedings 

A-13870256 

Decided by Regional Commissioner September 12, 1968 

(1) To be eligible for the benefits of Election 2 of the Act of November 2, 

1966, an applicant therefor must also come within, the purview of section 

1 of that Act [Matter of Benguria y Rodriguez, 12 I. & N. Dec. 143, reaffirmed]; hence, the 2-year physical presence requirement of section 1 applies equally to section 2 of that Act. An applicant under section 2 may 

complete the 2 years physical presence in the United States subsequent to 

his lawful admission for permanent residence. 

(2) Only physical presence completed subsequent to commencement of "residence" as that term is defined in section 101(a) (38), Immigration and Nationality Act, satisfies the physical presence requirement of sections 1 and 

2 of the Act of November 2, 1966. 

(3) While "residence" may be established after admission in a temporary 

status, where applicant, following entry in December 1960 as a temporary 

visitor, departed and remained outside the United States for over 4 years, 

again making 2 short visits to the United States in 1965, he did not establish a "residence" in this country prior to December 21, 1965, the date he 

was admitted as an immigrant, for the purposes of satisfying the applicable physical presence requirement in order to establish eligibility for the 

benefits of section 2 of the Act of November 2, 1968. 

ON BVIALP or APPLICANT: Patterson, Belknap & Webb 

One Wall Street 

New York, New York 10006 

This case comes forward by certification from the District 

Director, Miami, Florida, who first rejected the application on the 

ground that the applicant did not have the required two years 

physical presence in the United States prior to his admission for 

permanent residence. (Emphasis supplied.) The District Director 

reconsidered that decision and concluded that an applicant for the 

benefits of section 2 of the Act of November 2, 1966 may complete 

the two years physical presence in the United States subsequent 

to his arrival as a permanent resident. He found, however, that 

the applicant did not reside in the United States prior to his ad79 
interim .ueelmon ivzo 

mission (for permanent residence) on December 21, 1965 and 

does not have the actual two years physical presence in the 

United States. The application was denied on that basis and certified for review. 

The applicant is a native and citizen of Cuba, born in Havana 

on August 16, 1917. He was inspected and admitted to the United 

States as a nonimmigrant visitor on December 11, 1960 and departed from the country in March 1961. He again visited in the 

United States from . April 27, 1965 to June 21, 1965 and from 

September 11, 1965 to September 20, 1965. He obtained an immigrant visa at the American Embassy, Managua, Nicaragua on 

September 23, 1965 and was lawfully admitted into the United 

States for permanent residence on December 21, 1965. In his application for the immigrant visa, executed on September 8, 1965, 

he indicated that he resided in Havana, Cuba until December 

1960; in Panama, Republic of Panama from March 1961 to February 1968 and in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic from 

February 1963 to April 1965. He stated in the same application 

that he had been in the United States as a tourist in 1951, 

1960-61, and 1965. After admission for permanent residence, the 

applicant obtained a reentry permit on August 4, 1966 valid for 

one year and an extension for that permit valid to August 3, 

1968_ A. request dated January 10, 1968 for the applicant to appear at our Miami office was returned with a note from his son 

that the applicant was no longer in the United States since his 

work in Panama made it impossible for him to reside continually 

in the United States. He did appear at the Miami of ice f on March 

29, 1968. The record is otherwise silent concerning the physical 

presence of the applicant in the United States subsequent to his 

admission for permanent residence. Counsel states in his brief 

dated August 2, 1968 "Thus far the applicant has been physically 

present in the United States for a total of approximately seventeen months." 

The pertinent sections of the Act of November 2, 1966 provide 

as follows : 

That, notwithstanding the provisions of section 245(c) of the Immigration 

and Nationality Act, the status of any alien who is a native or citizen of 

Cuba and who has been inspected and admitted or paroled into the United 

States subsequent to January 1, 1959 and has been physically present in the 

United States for at least two years, may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to 

that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if the alien 

makes an application for such adjustment, and the alien is eligible to receive 

an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence. Upon approval of such en application for adjustment of status, the 

80 
Interim Decision *1925 

Attorney General shall create a record of the alien's admission for permanent residence as of a date thirty months prior to the filing of such an application or the date of his last arrival into the United States, whichever 

date is later. The provisions of this Act shall be applicable to the spouse 

and child of any alien described in this subsection, regardless of their citizenship and place of birth, who are residing with such alien in the United 

States. 

Sec. 2. In the case of any alien described in section 1 of this Act who, 

prior to the effective date thereof, has been lawfully admitted into the 

United States for permanent residence, the Attorney General shall, upon application, record his admission for permanent residence as of the date the 

alien originally arrived in the United States as a nonimmigrant or as a parolee, or a date thirty months prior to the date of enactment of this Act, 

whichever date is later. 

Counsel contends that the phrase in section 2 of the Act *** 

"any alien described in section 1 of this Act" refers only to that 

part of section 1 which describes "any alien who is a native or 

citizen of Cuba and who has been inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States subsequent to January 1, 1959." He 

submits that the next phrase of section 1 "and has been physically present in the United States for at least two years," is not a 

part of the description of eligible aliens but Is only a condition 

precedent to adjustment of status under section 1. The legislative 

history of the Act lends some weight to this view since the legislators appear to have discussed the physical presence requirement 

only in connection with adjustment of status under section 1. 

The genesis of this law, however, indicates that the bill initially 

passed by the House contained no physical presence requirements 

but likewise, no retroactive provisions. The record of admission 

was to be created as of the date the application was granted. The 

Senate added the requirement for two years physical presence 

and provisions for creating the record of admission for permanent residence as of the alien's last arrival. This was changed in 

conference to, in effect, limit the retroactive provisions of section 

1 to not more than 30 months. 

Congress recognized that many Cubans, after being in the 

United States for sometime as refugees, determined to make their 

status permanent and proceed toward United States citizenship 

through naturalization. As a first step, they expended the time, 

effort, and money to go abroad tb get an immigrant visa and return to their homes in the United States with a lawful admission 

for permanent residence. The retroactive provisions of section 1 

of the Act alone would have had the awkward effect of placing 

many of these aliens in a less favorable position than had they 

not obtained lawful admission for permanent residence. Congress 

81 
Interim Decision #1925 

sought to correct this inequity by giving this class of Cuban refugees an opportunity for the same retroactive benefits under section 2 as they could have obtained under section 1 had they not 

acquired lawful admission for permanent residence prior to the 

effective date of the Act. 

We therefore reaffirm our decision in the Matter of Benguria y 

Rodriguez, 12 I. & N. Dec. 143, that an applicant cannot be eligible for the benefits of section 2 if he does not first come within 

the purview of section 1 of the Act. We find that the intent of 

Congress was to place aliens under section 2 on a par with those 

under section 1 and that the physical presence requirements of 

section 1 apply equally to section 2. In furtherance of this concept 

of parity, we affirm the District Director's finding that an applicant under section 2 of the Act may complete the two years physical presence in the United States subsequent to his lawful admission for permanent residence. 

The clear intent of Congress in providing the retroactive 

features of both section 1 and section 2 of the Act of November 

2, 1966 was to provide some credit for residence toward naturalization to those Cuban aliens who had established themselves and 

actually resided in the United States for some time as refugees 

and had not abandoned their residence here. We must distinguish 

between visits to the United States and residence. There is no indication that Congress intended to provide credit toward naturalization for brief visits to the United States nor for other periods 

of time when the alien was neither in fact nor in law an actual 

resident of the United States. 

In establishing the effective date of the alien's record of admission for permanent residence, section 1 provides "***a date thirty 

months prior to the filing of such application or the date of his 

last arrival into the United States, whichever date is later." Section 2 provides "***the date the alien originally arrived in the 

United States as•a nonimmigrant or as a parolee, or a date thirty 

months prior to the date of enactment of this Act, whichever date 

is later." (Emphasis supplied.) 

It was found in Matter of Rim, 12 I. & N. Dec. 56, that the 

term "last arrival" as used in section 1 and the term "originally 

arrived" as used in section 2 both refer to the same arrival in 

point of time, namely the alien's first arrival after January 1, 

1959, oa which occasion he was inspected and admitted or paroled 

into the United States. It was further found that a subsequent arrival after a temporary absence from the United States with no 

intention to abandon residence in the United States does not con82 
Interim Decision #1925 

stitute the "last arrival" within the contemplation of section 1 of 

the Act. 

Our applicant, in effect, asks that we adjust the date of his 

lawful admission to the United States for permanent residence 

from his actual date of admission for permanent residence (December 21, 1965) to May 2, 1964 (30 months prior to the date of 

enactment of the Act) on the basis of his entry as a visitor on 

December 11, 1960. If we could consider that he had resided in 

the United States continuously since December 11, 1960, we 

would have no problem. However, the record reflects that after 

the 1960 entry he remained in the United States as a bona fide 

visitor for about three months. He then departed and remained 

outside the country for over four years. He again visited the 

United States from April 27, 1965 to J tine 21, 1965 and from 

September 11 to 20, 1965. He is, therefore, in an entirely different posture from a refugee who, after initial arrival, actually resided In the United States but made brief visits abroad. Our applicant is actually asking that we credit him for time as a 

permanent resident toward naturalization during which he was 

not a resident of the United States and had been absent from the 

country for over four years. This was clearly not the intent of 

Congress. 

As stated previously, we agree with the District Director that 

the two years of physical presence in the United States may be 

completed subsequent to admission as a lawful permanent resident. However, only physical presence completed subsequent to 

commencement of "residence" as that term is defined in section 

101(a) (33) of the Immigration and Nationality Act may be recognized. That section states in pertinent part: "The term 'residence' means the place of general abode; the place of general 

abode of a person means his principal, actual dwelling place in 

fact, without regard to intent." Thus, "residence" may be established after admission in a temporary status. However, we find 

from the circumstances in this case that the applicant did not establish a residence prior to December 21, 1965, on which date he 

was admitted as an immigrant. In any event the applicant does 

not have two years of physical presence in the United States. 

Consequently, he is not eligible to have the record of his admission for permanent residence adjusted under section 2 of the Act 

of November 2, 1966. The application will be denied. 

ORDER: The decision of the District Director, Miami, Florida 

is affirmed and the application is denied. 

83